Matt Lewis, who regularly conjures up insightful thoughts on the 2016 scramble, crowns Gov. Chris Christie as the winner of the shutdown frenzy.
From Lewis’ column in The Week:
Several of his potential 2016 rivals, like Sens. Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, and Rand Paul, were all — to varying degrees — backing the quixotic “defund ObamaCare” strategy. Today, they look like children in comparison to a get-things-done governor like Christie. I don’t necessarily think this shutdown will be on the minds of voters in 2016, but what we are witnessing is merely the latest example of a Congress that can’t get its act together. Voters will have to ask themselves, “Can we trust these guys to govern?”
In times of crisis and chaos, the public is more likely to turn to a strong-willed executive. I’m not suggesting Christie is an out-and-out authoritarian. He just feels like one. His bullying and bluster might have been mocked in a calmer time. But these days, one imagines the public might yearn for a leader who can, though the sheer force of his will, force Congress into line. Maybe we need someone strong to break the fever?
I agree with Lewis that Christie — and frankly any governor — benefits from moments like these when Washington looks like a cesspool of stagnation featuring politicians more focused on the spin war than accomplishing something tangible.
But given my reporting on where the GOP base and even the establishment outside the Beltway is on this fight, color me skeptical that Christie sits in the driver’s seat.
First, take the governor’s chest-thumping response to the D.C. chaos. It’s great theater, but not particularly practical:
“My approach would be, as the executive, is to call in the leaders of the Congress, the legislature, whatever you’re dealing with and say that we’re not leaving this room until we fix this problem,” Christie said Monday in the hours before the government shutdown. “Because I’m the boss, I’m in charge.”
Whoever thinks that quirky Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and ironclad Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi would acquiesce to Christie’s demands and not leave a room before cutting a deal has been drinking with Snooki too long on the Jersey Shore. There’s a reasonable theory to pose whether Christie’s celebrity status is more about his blustery, pugnacious style than anything of substance. When push came to shove, would he have joined the Ted Cruz talk-a-thon just to prove a point, as Rand Paul and Marco Rubio did? He has the luxury of not answering that question.
Additionally, the response to Cruz’s pseudo-filibuster last week — even among key members of the Republican National Committee (i.e. the establishment)– was overwhelmingly positive.
The South Carolina Republican Party went as far to call a special meeting to back Cruz’s crusade. And Cruz, unquestionably benefited politically by pulling off such a stunt, soaring in a national poll. It’s hard for me not to believe that the person who got the most mileage — potentially short-term — out of this episode was Ted Cruz, especially when narrowly applying it to the primary field audience.
Lewis himself isn’t sure Christie could win a primary — (To be fair, I’m not neither — Other than New Hampshire, where does he win in the first slate of contests? Can he even compete in Iowa?)
But he has a point when he notes that both Mitt Romney and John McCain secured their nominations, in no small part due to a splintered conservative base. That’s why I have Christie ranked so high on The Chase.
So, I agree that this will undoubtedly be a moment for Christie to point to on a debate stage two years from now, in order to underline Washington dysfunction and contrast it with the steady and orderly progress he achieved at the state level.
But it’s hard to pinpoint this — (likely brief) — shutdown as a transformational moment in the 2016 race.
Recall how short the collective political attention span can be.
Just one short month ago, the country was on the eve of war in Syria.
Follow Dave’s blog at TheRun2016.com
